Skip to main content
Solved

Issue ray tracing after mirror reflection - curvature of radius fails

  • October 23, 2024
  • 7 replies
  • 189 views

whit2452

I am running into an issue placing lenses following a mirrored surface. 

 

Here is my design in sequential mode: 

AGV_vUee9xyouAFTVUjPgOGZ3DrXaOU9GVTOqhSSPijc-iZMfUacnmTEre7UNvcUcy6GEzNtYp4dKxw0gk_FNGYNo9C256ABF34KwlF_uVRZyQDRxmEN9NYch3EePUuaxUUl7L30iSGpSH6AbfKrOkipzfNEndansMc=s2048?key=54XQhJMCOY4xx-YpKaaYhQ

Then I add K-mirror before the lens assembly in non-sequential mode: 

AGV_vUdHnj5mkaxLsR-ISMOA98LfcZ9aRr4bspPZ8BUWf2VOTGLfzthdnL4SoX2nG-k7F-wUZT9oBEgCUZ24R65v1JSx-VYfAmujvki24JnLxinAFDLxkKM7rrr1McX4nWURkvtKZJ9TtlM1kMkGYRNrUMb5wxdTkjCz=s2048?key=54XQhJMCOY4xx-YpKaaYhQ

 

After the mirrors are added changing the curvature of radius of the lens assembly fails. The light is not reflected through the lenses and Zemax draws the lens as large circles. Any clue as to what is causing the issue? 

 

AGV_vUdCFOH3ZHFore96Zoit1P57BdNQv_wHhDyEVXI-9rthsHPKrFl9ejloyoArAID_JZ5zoeCdpcWQe6LqJ8IW4qhbhNmDtFKYOCeIMt21TvXX4GXBZFT1cyoz-nIl9eiAs16oO4nRyEB-n50Ky1RfEsKcKr9Jc00=s2048?key=54XQhJMCOY4xx-YpKaaYhQ

 

 

Best answer by MichaelH

Since there are 3 mirrors, you have odd parity.  Are you changing your radii to the opposite sign?

Run the Setup > System Check (the stop light button) and see if there are any errors.

Also, for these surfaces, open the Lens Data Editor Surface property and check the box for Type > Surface Cannot Be Hyperhemipheric.  

View original
Did this topic help you find an answer to your question?

7 replies

Mike.Jones
En-Lightened
Forum|alt.badge.img+3
  • En-Lightened
  • 113 replies
  • October 23, 2024

What is your Ray Aiming set to?  Try Paraxial, cache on.  


MichaelH
Ansys Staff
Forum|alt.badge.img+2
  • Ansys Staff
  • 356 replies
  • Answer
  • October 24, 2024

Since there are 3 mirrors, you have odd parity.  Are you changing your radii to the opposite sign?

Run the Setup > System Check (the stop light button) and see if there are any errors.

Also, for these surfaces, open the Lens Data Editor Surface property and check the box for Type > Surface Cannot Be Hyperhemipheric.  


whit2452
  • Author
  • Monochrome
  • 3 replies
  • October 25, 2024
MichaelH wrote:

Since there are 3 mirrors, you have odd parity.  Are you changing your radii to the opposite sign?

Run the Setup > System Check (the stop light button) and see if there are any errors.

Also, for these surfaces, open the Lens Data Editor Surface property and check the box for Type > Surface Cannot Be Hyperhemipheric.  

Thank you for your answer! Changing the sign of the curvature does not fix my issue. Checking the lenses “cannot be hyperhemipheric” does help remove the giant circles, but as you can see in the image the light still is not tracing correctly. 

I ran the system check and got the error: “Angle of incidence for chief ray exceeds 90 degrees” on the 3rd mirror surface and all the surfaces following. I never used this feature before so thank you for sharing. I can see though that the angle of incidence is not greater than 90 so I am still wondering what causes this problem. 

AGV_vUd3_jZXncpO6Gsh1aRXaMfy4VWn_7zLa2uIadTMU1G1uGL8SyCTnUmiNRYXTrCxvxgr_e8A0YIELEVidpEiXAauBC5BI6FfKD2ji2113jo_ZekyuRcG-3W8s5uwKTsSzJkPlOklUgZD8Gr7DHhzrA5lxkUcV5bD=s2048?key=54XQhJMCOY4xx-YpKaaYhQ

 


MichaelH
Ansys Staff
Forum|alt.badge.img+2
  • Ansys Staff
  • 356 replies
  • October 28, 2024

Hey Ramona,

Since rays extend to both positive and negative infinity, you’ll have 2 angles the ray makes with the mirror:

  • θ
  • 180° - θ

The reported angle depends on the mirror’s local axis.  OpticStudio always expects the dot product (angle of incidence) the ray and the local axis to be less than 90°. Although you don’t show the local axis, I believe your third mirror has a local axis which is pointing down and to the left:

You can show the local axis by clicking the Draw Local Axis box in the Lens Data Editor’s Properties section:

 

If this is the case, then you should be able to simply rotate your third mirror by 180° so the local axis is pointing up and to the right.

If this doesn’t work, can you please share your file.  That will help with the debugging process.


whit2452
  • Author
  • Monochrome
  • 3 replies
  • October 29, 2024
MichaelH wrote:

Hey Ramona,

Since rays extend to both positive and negative infinity, you’ll have 2 angles the ray makes with the mirror:

  • θ
  • 180° - θ

The reported angle depends on the mirror’s local axis.  OpticStudio always expects the dot product (angle of incidence) the ray and the local axis to be less than 90°. Although you don’t show the local axis, I believe your third mirror has a local axis which is pointing down and to the left:

You can show the local axis by clicking the Draw Local Axis box in the Lens Data Editor’s Properties section:

 

If this is the case, then you should be able to simply rotate your third mirror by 180° so the local axis is pointing up and to the right.

If this doesn’t work, can you please share your file.  That will help with the debugging process.

Thank you for your helpful response! The local axis of the third mirror was actually already pointing up. When I rotate the mirrors by 180 the angle of incidence errors go away, but then the system only traces virtual rays in the wrong direction. 

I will share my file here: 

 


MichaelH
Ansys Staff
Forum|alt.badge.img+2
  • Ansys Staff
  • 356 replies
  • October 29, 2024

Hi Ramona,

You have virtual rays because the thicknesses are all positive.  If you have an odd number of mirrors (in your file, you have 5 mirrors), then all the thicknesses need to be negative (and the radius needs to have the opposite sign as what you would normally use).


whit2452
  • Author
  • Monochrome
  • 3 replies
  • October 31, 2024
MichaelH wrote:

Hi Ramona,

You have virtual rays because the thicknesses are all positive.  If you have an odd number of mirrors (in your file, you have 5 mirrors), then all the thicknesses need to be negative (and the radius needs to have the opposite sign as what you would normally use).

I appreciate you looking at my file. Negative thickness makes no sense to me because if I do that, the lens assembly is on the wrong side of the telescope and the order is all wrong. The thicknesses are chosen because that is where I need them placed, if its negative they are in the wrong spot. 

AGV_vUes5Y7PBTN443Xapmb6Lhq3Zcm9RqFOF16D_XvQisz2ibSit-KWliUX5u99gmFO8k_piGIqlFFQPd9Nt_BQiNj9hZlIK_jptkupO0A4igMb7Oql-S9U6Y1OOV4teCtmIDylV03IRqv0cPCS4Z6USPt4tnVpgU3M=s2048?key=54XQhJMCOY4xx-YpKaaYhQ

 

 


Reply


Cookie policy

We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

 
Cookie settings